Good Queer

Thursday, February 28, 2008

The term bigenderism is making room for people who do not fit into the binary boxes of female and male. People who are bigendered are not seeking surgery or transitioning into male or female gender. For the last year or so, Genderqueer is/was a term to describe bigendered people. The only problem with genderqueer is that he does not create understanding to most people. Yes, genderqueer is loudly saying that their gender is more visible than gays and lesbians who visually look heterosexuals.

I say I imagine we're sitting on a porch of a log cabin in the the mountains. Alexander says, I imagine, we're right here, right now, crack houses and drug dealers and all.

The guy next door is dividing his sacks of pop cans and beer bottles to cash in for a dime bag. Another neighbor walks to and fro daily, asking Alexander if he' cold. He says he's from Alaska. That's what I used to say to people too, when I was outside in the wind, but in my case it was true. But now, the cigarette habit has slowed my blood and I am always in cold.

I feel like a stuffed doll, like a scarecrow dressed in Alexander's wool coats. I think if lower my face, his hat covering my eyes, I would cease to be animate. I would truly be a scarecrow to ward off the ones Alexander fears: the shiny blue feathers of death sitting atop the power line. If I raise my head to look in one beady crow's eye they would swoop down down to take his soul away. For they only fear the imitation of life. He knows without having heard Transylvanian mythology that crows are speakers with the dead and he fears they to have the ability to bring the grey rain and the wind.

The balcony where he spends his days in books cannot protect him from their elemental force, the wall isn't high enough. I try to conjure the memories of beaches, of watching his best friend get high.

I am trying to give him something good.

I am try passing even the memory of sunburned skin, for he wills it more than the darkness. But the past is lost to him in a void of swirling confusion of dates of dates and times.

It is the melancholy of love separated but not lost that plagues him.

Though I try, I am no shaman. My visions are not truth, but I tell him I can see the future. He does not believe description of the spring in his heart, it's warmth thawing, the ice scraped across his knotted brow will smooth. I say almost all that I feel, and he lifts his head to listen, but his expression is distant. When I am finally silent he laughs, "You little tramp," and puts his face back into his book.

About the writer, Carissa Anne Christensen: she writes about the human experience of life and helping others become free.

The Pimping of Black America: Why Much of the Corporate Media Supports Barack Obama - Keeping It Real

Cover Story: Why I Got Angry After New Hampshire

- The White Curtain and the Possibility of Hope - The African World By Bill Fletcher, Jr., BC Executive Editor

I have not been an Obama supporter. On the issues, I have felt that Kucinich and Edwards are clearer and more on point. They have been talking about some real changes in domestic and foreign policy, and I applaud that. I have been disappointed that they have not grasped race far more than they have, but they tend to lean in the right direction.

But that is not why I am writing this piece.

I got angry after the New Hampshire primary. Going into the primary, Senator Obama had a 13-point lead over Senator Clinton. Senator Clinton had virtually issued her concession speech. Yet, Senator Clinton came out on top.

There have been a number of reasons offered by pundits as to what happened:

Some have suggested that Senator Clinton became more humane through the misting of her eyes during a candid moment (captured on camera). * Some have suggested that the perception of Senator Clinton being "attacked" by both former Senator Edwards and Senator Obama led to a sympathy factor. * Others have suggested that Senator Obama became cocky and stopped reaching out for support. * Still others believe that the "white curtain" (a term used by writer Bob Wing) came into play and that white voters said one thing to the pollsters and did another thing behind the curtain.

I do not think there was any one factor, although I am inclined to believe that the "white curtain" was far more in play than the media let on. And this failure on the part of the established media to give more credence to the "white curtain," or what in other circles is called the “Bradley Factor” (after the reversal in fortune by former LA Mayor Tom Bradley, who lost the election for California governor in the 1980s after all of the polls indicated that he was a shoe-in) has my back up.

In a Washington Post column from January 11th, African American commentator Eugene Robinson suggested that what often happens when Black candidates run is not so much that whites change their minds, but that the numbers of white undecided voters enter into the picture and they cast their ballots for the white candidate. I have great respect for Robinson, however, this seems like a distinction without a difference. It begs the question of what inspires these white undecided voters to turn out in high numbers to vote AGAINST a Black candidate. In that sense, it may be that we have to look at this question of the "white curtain"’ a bit differently, i.e., that it may not be so much a matter of white voters indicating - to pollsters - that they will support a Black candidate and then voting otherwise, but rather that large numbers of white voters use the category of "undecided" in order to shield their true preference.

The second source of my anger has to do with the Clintons, and I use the plural here. If another Black person calls former President Bill Clinton the alleged “first Black President,” I think I will personally take their head off, followed by their arms and legs. Rather than treating Senator Obama’s candidacy as a serious one with which they have significant differences (which they actually do not), there has been the use, by the Clintons, of codes as a way of attacking Obama’s character. The emphasis on “experience” is one such code. The denigration of the idea of “hope” is another code. Instead of forcing Senator Obama to clarify his positions on the issues, which is in fact his key weakness, the Clintons have engaged in attacks on the candidate as a person, something of which Senator Obama is undeserving.

Former President, Bill Clinton, was unsettled by the way some of his recent comments were interpreted as suggesting that he believed Senator Obama’s candidacy to be a fantasy. Instead, Bill Clinton was, in my opinion, quite correctly - but for the wrong reason - suggesting that the media is turning the Obama candidacy into a fantasy. Yet what is important here has been the reaction within Black America. Bill Clinton’s remarks were HEARD as part of a character assassination against Senator Obama. African Americans, for a host of reasons, have been and continue to be slow to warm to the Obama campaign, but when Obama is personally attacked, the Clintons can be guaranteed they will encounter genuine anger that they may not be able to overcome.

Ok, now I am a bit calmer. But here is my other point: Senator Obama is going to need a strategic "rethink." The Obama campaign has gone a long way on motivation and good feeling, but with little content. Obama has fostered the illusion that we can all join together and that he will oversee the construction of an historically unprecedented united front of Democrats, Republicans and Independents to bring us into a new age. He has studiously avoided any tough issues, yet is prepared to make reckless foreign policy suggestions, e.g., unilateral US military action against Al Qaeda bases in Pakistan and the need to take action against Iran (without defining why Iran is an alleged problem). Contrary to his competitor in the change category, former Senator Edwards, he has largely shied away - until quite recently - from discussing the fact that the US is polarizing along wealth and income lines, as well as the fact that labor unions are key to economic justice.

The Obama Campaign may have believed that they could use “hope” and “bi-partisanship” as their tickets to the White House, but that route seems to be fraught with problems. The New Hampshire loss makes it imperative that the Obama campaign redefines itself as it approaches Super Tuesday. As both Clinton and Edwards press him, the former on his character, the latter on his views, Obama will be compelled to define himself as an independent political figure with a clearer vision as to what sort of country, indeed world, he wishes to construct. If he does not, he will be condemned to be viewed as a motivational speaker rather than a champion of a new path.

Having walked the fence for so long, I am not sure that Senator Obama is prepared to be the practitioner of a new political direction. There is an important place for both hope and fine language, but if the vote is in his favor, the question will be: what happens after Inauguration, Senator?

Bill Fletcher, Jr. is Executive Editor of The Black Commentator. He is also a Senior Scholar with the Institute for Policy Studies and the immediate past president of TransAfrica Forum. Click here to contact Mr. Fletcher.

Malcom X realized that being a Good N. was hurting the black movement and it was time that African Americans took their rightful place guaranteed in the US Constitution. He created a mind paradigm shift of white and black peoples thinking about the expectations of how black people "fit into" Americas culture. He visited Africa and told Americans of the progress of Africans compared to the progress of black Americans. He taught blacks to defend themselves and to bare arms to protect themselves and their families. He used the expression called,"any means necessary" which scared whites who did not want to relinquish white privilege.Malcom X was criticised by his own community for not having a peaceful message like Martin Luther King(MLK). MLK would not have been effective without Malcolm X's messages of self defense. Whites were given a choice, the Civil Rights movement was going to turn into a racial war or submit to the Civil Rights movement. Yes, many white people did support the Civil Rights movement but blacks Civil Rights movement was not a popularity vote which required federal protective legislation. The federal legislation was backed up by he National Guard in the south who were forced to submit to the end of segregation. If civil rights were a popularity vote, the South would still have Jim Crow.

For those who do not know Jim Crow, they were laws that segregated blacks from whites in education, public facilities, buses, employment, etc. It was also was illegal for blacks to marry whites. Many free-thinkers will acknowledge that Oregon's' Measure 36 is an example of Jim Crow because it segregates marriage between nonheterosexuals and heterosexuals.

NAGQ does not know if Malcom X was for equal rights for queer people. What NAGQ does know is that Malcom X was always transforming himself in his politics and faith. His mind was not fixed and he allowed himself to grow and learn new ideas. He did not get a chance to fight for queers but NAGQ believes that one could substitute his reference to Afro Americans to Queer people today. What he is saying, is the message that the Queer community needs to change their strategy in achieving Gay Civil Rights because the strategy is obviously not working. The road of Gay Leaders needs to change and NAGQ would suggest targeting heterosexist rather than homophobic behavior which would cause institutional changes versus reacting to gay people.

It matters that our economy is healthy and competitive in the global marketplace.

It matters that minority voices be heard and be counted.

It matters what kind of race I run -- win or lose.

My race to be mayor of Portland will be about investing in our educational systems. While K-12 is vital to the well-being of our community, so is pre-kindergarten, higher education and lifelong learning. Healthy schools are key to retaining and attracting families to put down roots and become part of the fabric of our thriving city.

My race will be about the health of our economy. Well-paying jobs allow us to keep our lifestyle satisfying. But more than that, our businesses must be competitive in the fast-moving global economy. We need to be reaching outside of our comfort zone by seeking new markets, building long-lasting relationships that will ensure new jobs in the future. We need bold leadership that can steer us to new opportunities.

My race will be about inclusiveness. We should all matter, but to be counted we must take part in the discussion about the future. We need to take action to achieve our goals. And everyone in our community should take responsibility to make us better by voting. Because if you don't vote, you cannot matter. In a democracy, it's at the ballot box that your voice is finally heard.

My race will be about being free from special interests and political influence. It will be financed through the Portland law that allows any citizen who qualifies to run for citywide office with public funds. This system will allow me to run without obligation to anyone but the citizens who are financing my race. I will run as the people's candidate in the truest sense.

My race will be about the value of public service as well as the need for good government. What we need now in City Hall is a good dose of accountability as to how our tax dollars are spent with the right priorities for investing in our future. We need leadership that can be held responsible to do the right thing for the right reason -- leadership that has been tested and tempered with real-life experiences.

My race will be about the future of this city -- not just about the next four years. It is about the future of our children and grandchildren, about the vision for a city that has not yet realized its full potential. Portland can become one of the best cities in the world if we all work together.

It all matters, and that's why I will run for the honor of serving as the next mayor of Portland.

Sho Dozono is owner of Azumano Travel.

Just because Not a good queer is gay, does not mean that I had to vote for Sam Adams. Sam Adams is an excellent city councilman but I like former teachers who are in politics because they have first hand experience about students!